|
nChrist
|
 |
« on: August 29, 2015, 06:48:11 PM » |
|
________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 8-28-2015
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________
Daily Digest
Aug. 28, 2015
THE FOUNDATION
“Nevertheless, to the persecution and tyranny of his cruel ministry we will not tamely submit — appealing to Heaven for the justice of our cause, we determine to die or be free.” —Joseph Warren, American account of the Battle of Lexington, 1775
TOP RIGHT HOOKS
Hillary Thinks Republicans Share Terrorists' View of Women1
While stalking the campaign trail Thursday, Hillary Clinton fired a bazooka at the Republican Party and missed. Clinton slammed the stances several GOP candidates hold on “women’s issues” such as equal pay, reproductive health care and abortion. She said2, “Extreme views about women? We expect that from some of the terrorist groups. We expect that from people who don’t want to live in the modern world. But it’s a little hard to take coming from Republicans who want to be the president of the United States.” You could see the poor politician from Arkansas New York Washington struggling to even stand in the shadow of Democrat orator William Jennings Bryan. She’s more akin to Barack Obama, who recently declared Iranian hardliners were “making a common cause with the Republican caucus3.” Hillary’s comment smacks of desperation to be a cool grandma, to float a stalling campaign. Before Clinton wants to unearth the hatchet and fight the “War on Women,” she might want to do some research. While her Senate office paid women 72 cents for every dollar it paid men, Carly Fiorina’s campaign4 already bridged the gender pay gap. Last time we checked, most Republicans argue for policies that promote life. The Islamic State institutionalized sex slavery5 because they believe raping 12-year-old Yazidi girls is an act of worship. Is that really the comparison she wants to make?
EPA Checked in Its Takeover of America’s Waterways6
The EPA was hours away from implementing an expansive interpretation of the Clean Water Act when a judge in North Dakota issued an injunction blocking the power grab. In response to a suit brought by 13 states, Judge Ralph Erickson halted Thursday the EPA’s rule that would have, according to Rep. Richard Hanna7 (R-NY), placed the agency in control of every ditch, man-made pond and flood plain in the nation. Erickson wrote8, “Once the rule takes effect, the states will lose their sovereignty over intrastate waters that will then be subject to the scope of the Clean Water Act.” The EPA isn’t accepting the judge’s orders. It said in a statement that it will only comply with the injunction in the 13 states that were part of the suit. However, there are nine other suits brought against the EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in regards to the water rule. In total, 29 states are questioning the EPA’s authority in the matter. In addition to having a river in Colorado to clean up9, the courts have been checking the EPA’s abuse of power — such as the Supreme Court’s June ruling10 about the EPA’s emission guidelines for coal plants. This hasn’t been a good stretch for the EPA.
States Approving Huge Premium Increases11
“My expectation is that [rate increases] come in significantly lower than what’s being requested,” Barack Obama told a Nashville audience last month. After all, he promised ObamaCare would bend the cost curve down, right? And that it would save the typical family $2,500 a year in premiums, right? Wrong. So much for that. According to12 The Wall Street Journal, Tennessee Insurance Commissioner Julie Mix McPeak “answered [that question] on Friday by greenlighting the full 36.3% increase sought by the biggest health plan in the state, BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee. She said the insurer demonstrated the hefty increase for 2016 was needed to cover higher-than-expected claims from sick people who signed up for individual policies in the first two years of the Affordable Care Act.” So, Madam Commissioner, you’re telling us the Affordable Care Act isn’t exactly, uh, Affordable? So far, Tennessee’s rate increase is the highest approved this year, but two other states — North Carolina and Maryland — exceeded 30%, and half a dozen more were in double digits. Others, like Minnesota (seeking a whopping 54% hike), are yet to be determined. And lest anyone think higher premiums were paying for better coverage, most insurance carriers are also increasing deductibles and copays. Our own plan here in our humble shop now offers this wonderful trifecta of higher premiums, higher deductibles and higher copays. So we pay more up front, we pay more before we can receive care, and then we pay more when insurance finally does kick in. Remind us again how great ObamaCare is…
FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
Anchor Babies: The New ‘Republican Dog-Whistle’13
By Michael Swartz
America is still a welcoming country for immigrants, but the sentiment for pulling up the welcome mat is gaining steam. Failure to secure our borders, lax enforcement of immigration laws by a federal government that therefore tacitly encourages border crossing and overstay of visas, the perception that illegal aliens are sponging off the welfare system, and immigrants' growing lack of assimilation has angered millions of Americans.
Enter Donald Trump, who has made immigration a key part of his platform14. His latest vow15 is to get illegal immigrants “out of there day one … out so fast your head will spin.” With his corresponding surge in the political polls, the national conversation on the topic has shifted focus to the phrase “anchor babies.” It’s the term describing the effect of birthright citizenship, which itself is based on a faulty interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment16 when applied to children born to those here illegally.
The number of those who have come to the United States to give birth is increasing. While the Pew Hispanic Center says four out of five children of illegal aliens were born in this country17, it’s now estimated that one out of 10 American births overall would fall under the description “anchor babies.” Most are the offspring of illegal immigrants who understand current deportation policy gives them a “get out of jail free” card once the child is born — along with a claim to our generous public treasury18. But some anchor babies are born to “birth tourists”19 who arrive weeks before birth and do so specifically in order to have an American passport holder in the family to make securing their own visas easier.
It’s no secret that the Republican Party has factions on both sides of the immigration debate. Many of the other 16 presidential hopefuls align more or less with the hardline stance Trump has taken, yet it was immigration moderate Jeb Bush who became a lightning rod for Democrat criticism for using the term “anchor baby.”
In typical Jeb fashion, he tried to walk it back20, saying, “What I’m talking about is the specific case of fraud being committed where there’s organized efforts — frankly, it’s more related to Asian people — coming into our country, having children in that organized effort, taking advantage of that noble concept which is birthright citizenship.”
Needless to say, that muddled attempt at clarity didn’t work, and Democrats stuck to their marching orders.
“The ‘anchor baby’ narrative is politics at its worst,” wailed Rep. Linda Sanchez, chair of the all-Democrat Congressional Hispanic Caucus, in a Washington Post op-ed21. It serves “mostly as a Republican dog-whistle,” she added, “tapping into an implicit racial sentiment that suggests children of color are less than fully American or they’re just a vehicle for gaming the system.” |
